Adequate training vital for new employees

By VIKKI BLAND

A few years ago, a large firm promoted an employee to a more challenging position. It promised the employee on-the-job training, but it never eventuated. The employee became stressed and demoralised and eventually made mistakes, some of which affected customers.

Fearing a dismissal, the employee resigned, a decision he now regrets. Why? Because had his employment been terminated, an employment lawyer would have confirmed what the employee suspected at the time - that the employer had an obligation to provide training and an adequate induction for the new position.

"At the time I felt if I hadn't resigned they would have pushed me out. I felt totally inadequate," he says.

"I've since discovered what happened to me is quite common in big firms. Even firms that do provide training can overload you with information so that even trained people struggle. And very few firms seem to offer follow-up training."

Strategic learning consultant Susan Ockwell, who has been advising New Zealand companies on training and induction for 16 years, has heard such complaints before from employees left to find their own way in the dark.

Waiting too long to induct or train an employee is a common cause of morale and performance problems, she says, as is piling too much information too fast on to an employee or training only in non-crucial areas.

"I once worked with a large call centre that gave their people product knowledge but not on-the-job, scenario-based training," Ockwell says.

"Instead, they would tell their staff the only way to know the job was to survive a bad call and have their first good cry. It just blew me away they thought that was okay."

She says rather than leaving people to find their own way, new or promoted employees need training from day one, shedding light on the events and circumstances they will most commonly encounter.

"It's the old 80/20 rule; it's not much good focusing on emergency situations or 'this might happen occasionally' scenarios."

The best inductions, she says, take a structured approach that proceed through several levels depending on employee and position, starting with a bit of "pre-induction".

"For example, a new employee of Cadbury's might get a CD containing an enjoyable interactive presentation along with a range of product samples. Companies that go for the wow factor at pre-induction level often create little ambassadors for their company before that person even starts the job."

But what about job knowledge that can't be covered in a pre-induction programme - talking to a customer for example, or learning a new computer system?

Ockwell says companies need to realise people like to be useful and appreciate being useful as soon as possible.

"Employers must decide what's critical for an employee to know on the first day, the first week, the first month," she says.

She says many companies get confused about where induction stops and job training starts and important training falls through the gap as a result.

"Without an underlying structure, employers often dip in and out of induction levels without checking for employee competence. Then it all begins to take too long and the employee's morale is affected because their work peers are saying 'You've been here six months and you don't know that yet?"'

An ideal induction structure might start with a general group induction, which covers information that anyone in the company needs to know. At the next level may be divisional or strategic unit induction, then departmental induction. A team induction may need to follow that, then role induction and on-the-job training.

Differences in learning ability and approach needn't pose a problem in a thoughtfully structured induction environment, Ockwell says.

"Of course people learn in different ways. So if you have two people, one quick and impatient and one slower and more methodical, just give them the tools they need and let them proceed at their own pace. At the end provide a competency check to ensure both individuals have covered everything."

For group inductions where a large number of people are instructed together, Ockwell recommends providing ancillary activities which allow kinaesthetic learners (the twitchy ones) to try something hands on, even if it's just using a keyboard to access online information.

Auditory or visual learners can be given the option to do the same, or simply to listen or watch. However, all activities are conducted within the same time frame.

And time frames are important. Lynley Smith, HR manager for the New Zealand Racing Board (formerly the TAB), says that organisation found its original corporate induction course was too short.

"People were suffering from massive information overload. So we got external advice and redeveloped the course to run over two days."

Information overload is a common problem with inductions, says Ockwell, and the infamous start-up pack - often a folder stuffed with brochures - contributes to the problem.

"I knew of one poor employee who received a start-up pack with three different brochures about the same pension scheme."

Smith says companies should remember the importance of assessment, feedback and monitoring during induction and be aware of the importance of training employees from the first day on the job.

"We employ around 20 new people each year and run major training workshops quarterly," says Smith. "We realised we couldn't have new staff members waiting for the next workshop to roll around, so we put together written resources they could access from day one and initiated a buddy system."

She says despite a few learning curves, New Zealand Racing Board has had a smooth run in terms of induction.

However, according to specialists in employment law, this may be the exception rather than the rule.

Phillipa Muir, an employment specialist and partner with law firm Simpson Grierson, says there are cases in which dismissed employees seek legal help to fight a former employer over inadequate training. "There must be plenty of them out there."

But is the employer always at fault if induction or training experiences turn bad? How can employers, and employees for that matter, deal with problems before they escalate?

According to Evelyn Gates, HR manager for fast food giant McDonald's, having an open business culture and accessible communication channels is key.

"In McDonald's, communication is essential. If people are struggling they can talk to us. We have a buddy system and management support in place and we like to think that through counselling and training we are able to help most people to get up to speed."

Gates says as one of New Zealand's largest employers of young people, McDonald's inductions include teaching people how to get to work on time, present themselves and serve customers.

Interestingly, McDonald's follows the tiered-level induction structure Ockwell recommends.

The franchiser has around 6500 employees nationwide, all of whom have been through a health and safety induction, followed by a work safe and food safety induction. They're then taught how to prepare for a shift.

Gates says McDonald's training is internationally successful because it encourages people to follow consistent standards and procedures.

"There is a right way to do things at McDonald's and that is the way you do it. As a result, our people can typically master three food stations in 30 days.

"Employees get up to speed quicker depending on their number of shifts."

And it's not only McDonald's that gets training and induction right. Ockwell believes New Zealand induction and training processes have improved markedly in the past 16 years.

"Companies are starting to put more emphasis on getting their people off to a good start, because they know people are the only real competitive advantage in this world of commodities."